http://dogsinthenews.co.uk/?p=1735

Good news

Day 2 yet another good day

http://dogsinthenews.co.uk/?p=1747

Great! I wonder if that's because the judges are avoiding exaggerated dogs even more than they already were, or whether the Crufts show vets have a better idea of what is correct for a breed but not causing problems than a general vet does! I had noticed they hadn't mentioned the vet checks at all this year (that I've heard), though there's been a couple of mentions of avoiding over exaggerated wrinkles. :-)

I thought the Shar Pei looked very good!

Yes I did as well , my OH asked what breed of dog it was I told him and he said it can't be because the face is normally alot wrinkly.

http://www.facebook.com/DogsInTheNews/posts/566386790046523

Day three and all passed.

http://dogsinthenews.co.uk/?p=1771

Glad the Clumber got the all clear :-)

Excellent. Fingers crossed for today!

> whether the Crufts show vets have a better idea of what is correct for a breed

Thats not really the point, they should have no interest at all in what is "correct" for a breed but should simply be considering the dogs welfare.  Hopefully it was your former notion :)

>they should have no interest at all in what is "correct" for a breed but should simply be considering the dogs welfare.

Actually, the breed is important, otherwise in theory they could fail all dachshunds for having excessive length of back making them more prone than other breeds to having spinal issues, or all cocker spaniels for having heavy pendulous ears making them more susceptible to ear problems than other breeds.

I agree with Stooge here. After all if Dachsunds are prone to spinal issues due to their long backs then breeders should be selecting for slightly shorter backs and vets should be highlighting these problems

Louise

Stooge I'm with you here on this, a healthy eye and eyelid should be the same throughout, accepting entropion or entropion in some breeds and not others makes no sense as an example.
You can't say something is acceptable in one breed and not another, it's either a detriment to any dog or not.

Say for instance it's acceptable for some Clumbers to have a small amount of haw showing then this should be ok for any breed. It's either healthy or not, breed specifics don't wash with me on this.
Lameness is the same, not acceptable in any breed. Those who are overweight aren't what I call healthy either.

suejaw im 100% with you here too im very dissapointed with this years pickings i just dont get it!!.

>Actually, the breed is important, otherwise in theory they could fail all dachshunds for having excessive length of back making them more prone than other breeds to having spinal issues, or all cocker spaniels for having heavy pendulous ears making them more susceptible to ear problems than other breeds.

Yes, that's what I meant, thanks. :-)

LucyDogs, I perfectly understood you :) but I still disagree that the vets role should allow for them to dismiss signs of welfare issues on the basis that they can be attributed to a breed characteristic as you seemed to imply in your first post.  I would say quite the opposite.

Did everyone pass day 4 too? I think they were all there....?

I wonder if the goalposts were widened this year? Certainly I thought several breeds put forward much healtheir representatives like the bloodhound and clumber but look here at the Neapolitan mastiff BOBs eyes (scroll down to bottom), they look very sore to me.

Tricky - they do look quite red, but whether they are actually sore or not is impossible for us to tell, particularly from a photo. Interesting article though. I did think the bitch pictured was the least exaggerated of the lot, but the 20 month dog who got BOB isn't too bad, and although they comment that he isn't going to age well, they have to judge the dog on the day. They can't put a well moving relatively unexaggerated young dog down the line because he might look worse in a year's time! But Neopolitans really aren't my sort of dog to begin with!

Yes all passed throughout the four days

Certainly doesn't look good :(
If the comments are to be believed the "working" types are not quite so afflicted so I cannot see how they can justify it on a claim of some sort of functionality.

> I still disagree that the vets role should allow for them to dismiss signs of welfare issues on the basis that they can be attributed to a breed characteristic

Ah but there is degree.

Taken to logical conclusion all dogs that have anything but erect ears have more likelihood of ear issues.

All short legged breeds are actually exhibiting some dwarfism, as are all small breeds, and also very large ones, Gigantism.  Very tall people can have horrendous health issues.

Dogs with flews and jowls, are more prone to problems than those with close fitting lips.

Regarding eyes, some have very tight fitting lids, or deep set eyes, which if it goes too far can lead to entropion, and the reverse in looser skinned/lidded dogs.

Trichiasis and Distichiasis is only an excess or misplacing of the naturally protective lashes, not something anyone has deliberately bred for, think ingrowing toenails.

How do wild canids deal with dewclaws?  have they evolved to not have them, as no-one cuts the claw.  Do wolves chew them if they grow toward the leg????  I have certainly had my own dogs keep theirs short themselves.

Anything that has gone any real distance from the wild or feral dog template.

Depending on climate dogs with short or abundant coats also have compromised welfare.

What do we wish our dogs to be, dogs with all the different shapes sizes etc, or do we want to return them to some protodog, similar to it's ancestor?

Why is it that dog breeders get such a roasting all the time, What has been created from the Goldfish is in some cases quite grotesque and very lacking in function.

You have many breeds of Rabbit, Cavie, Mouse with characteristics incompatible with living without the assistance and care of man.  Caring for Angora rabbits coats is quite a task.

> Ah but there is degree.
>

As I understand it, the vets are looking for actual signs of damage or infection not the potential for it so degree is not really applied in these examinations.

Well there you go, so if a little haw is showing in a Clumber, but no sign of inflamation, it will pass.

On that note I was very pleased that I did not opt for the early eye testing time slot offered to me at Crufts, but went for one at 3.20pm, knowing breed judging would have been over.

By the time I left crufts my poor bitch was slitty and red eyed and obviously very uncomfortable, reacting to the drops she had been given to dilate her pupils.

I had one react like this at a show once, and the eye vet put some anasthetic drops in, to ease the discomfort. 

When I got home I put some lacrilube in them, (I sometimes get dry eyes since my cataract surgery) and that stopped her rubbing at them, and she was fine by morning, so thankfully didn't need to go in and see my vet.

> Well there you go, so if a little haw is showing in a Clumber, but no sign of inflamation, it will pass.

Yes, that is how I understand it. 

Well the neigh sayers now want more and want a full health check for each Bob, which shows they will never be happy. I don't even think if they carried a full health cert it would make them happy.

To be honest I'd be happier if we had a vet check for each BOB - doesn't seem fair to single just a few out.

It would send a strong message if a few hundred passed and only a few failed.